4. ¶Tullus was deemed most able against the enemy, but absolutely despised and neglected religion until, during the recurrence of a plague, he himself fell sick. Then, indeed, he paid the strictest regard to all the gods, and furthermore established the Salii Collini. (Valesius, p. 569.)
[Frag. VII]
¶Marcius, comprehending how it is not sufficient for men who wish to remain at peace to refrain from wrongdoing, and that refusing to molest others, without active measures, is not a means of safety, but the more one longs for it the more vulnerable does one become to the mass of mankind, changed his course. He saw that a desire for quiet was not a power for protection unless accompanied by equipment for war: he perceived also that delight in freedom from foreign broils very quickly and very easily ruined men who were unduly enthusiastic over it. For this reason he thought that war was nobler and safer, both as a preparation and as forethought, than was peace, and so whatever he was unable to obtain from the Latins with their consent, and without harming them, he took away against their will by means of a military expedition. (Mai, p. 139.)
[Frag. VIII]
¶Tarquinius, by using wealth, knowledge, and great wit opportunely everywhere, put Marcius in such a frame of mind than he was enrolled by the latter among the patricians and among the senators, was often appointed general and was entrusted with the guardianship of his children and of the kingdom. He was no less agreeable to the rest, and consequently ruled them with their consent. The reason was that while he took all measures from which he might derive strength he did not lose his head, but though among the foremost humbled himself. Any laborious tasks he was willing to undertake openly in the place of others, but in pleasure he willingly made way for others while he himself obtained either nothing or but little, and that unnoticed. The responsibility for what went well he laid upon any one sooner than upon himself and placed the resulting advantages within the reach of the public for whoever desired them, but more unsatisfactory issues he never laid to the charge of any one else, nor attempted to divide the blame. Besides, he favored all the friends of Marcius individually both by deeds and by words. Money he spent without stint and was ready to offer his services if any one wanted anything of him. He neither said nor did anything mean against any one, and did not fall into enmity with any one if he could help it. Furthermore, whatever benefits he received from any persons he always exaggerated, but unpleasant treatment he either did not notice at all or minimized it and regarded it is of very slight importance: not only did he refuse to take offensive measures in return, but he conferred kindnesses until he won the man over entirely. This gained him a certain reputation for cleverness, because he had mastered Marcius and all the latter's followers, but through subsequent events he caused the majority of men to be distrusted, either as being deceitful by nature or as changing their views according to their own influence and fortunes. (Valesius, p. 570.)
[Frag. IX]
Second Book of Dio: "As there was nothing in which they did not yield him obedience." (Bekker, Anecd. p. 164, 19.)
[Frag. X] 1. Dio, Book 2.—"Because his brother did not cooperate with him he secretly put him out of the way by poison through the agency of his wife." (Bekker, Anecd. p. 139, 17. Cp. Zonaras, 7, 9.)
2. ¶Tarquinius, when he had equipped himself sufficiently to reign over them even if they were unwilling, first arrested the most powerful members of the senate and next some of the rest, and put to death many publicly, when he could bring some real charge against them, and many besides secretly, while some he banished. Not merely because some of them loved Tullius more than him, nor because they had family, wealth, intelligence, and displayed conspicuous bravery and distinguished wisdom did he destroy them, out of jealousy and out of a suspicion likewise that their dissimilarity of character must force them to hate him, the while he defended himself against some and anticipated the attack of others; no, he slew all his bosom friends who had exerted themselves to help him get the kingship no less than the rest; for he thought that impelled by the audacity and fondness for revolution through which they had obtained dominion for him they might equally well give it to some one else. So he made away with the best part of the senate and of the knights and did not appoint to those orders any one at all in place of the men who had been destroyed: he understood that he was hated by the entire populace and was anxious to render the classes mentioned extremely weak through paucity of men. Yes, he even undertook to abolish the senate altogether, since he believed that every gathering of men and especially of chosen persons who had some pretence of prestige from antiquity, was most hostile to a tyrant. But as he was afraid that the multitude or else his body-guards themselves, in their capacity as citizens, might by reason of vexation at the change in government revolt, he refrained from doing this openly, but effected it in a conveniently outrageous way. He failed to introduce any new member into the senate to make up the loss, and to those who were left he communicated nothing of importance. He called the senators together not to help him in the administration of any important business; no, this very act was to give them a proof of their littleness, and thereby to enable him to humiliate and show scorn for them. Most of his business he carried on by himself or with the aid of his sons, in the first place to the end that no one else should have any power, and secondly because he shrank from publishing matters involving his own wrongdoing. He was difficult of access and hard to accost, and showed such great haughtiness and brutality toward all alike that he received the nickname among them of "Proud." Among other decidedly tyrannical deeds of himself and his children might be mentioned the fact that he once had some citizens bound naked to some crosses in the Forum and before the eyes of the citizens, and had them shamefully beaten to death with rods. This punishment, invented by him at that time, has often been inflicted. (Valesius, p. 573.)
3. Dio in 2nd Book: "Publicly and by arrangement reviling his father in many unusual ways on the ground that he was a tyrant and was forsworn." (Bekker, Anecd. p. 155, 1.)